Interlanguage

Comments (0)

Transcript of Interlanguage

Interlanguage - What is itA term coined by Selinker - 1972, as an attempt to describe the developing L2 system - all the linguistic levelsRefers to "the language system that each learner constructs an any given point in development"Marked the transition from the older school of contrastive analysis Differs systematically from both the native language and the target language BUT linked to themInterlanguage

Nature of InterlanguageThe learner's interlanguage changes over time and with exposure to the TL

Rules that learners' construct - similar to those of the native speakers BUT differ in many respectsOver the course of time - learners progress but the process may not be observableCharacteristics of Interlanguage: What lies behind Interlanguage?Cross - linguistic Influences and transferFossilizationEnglish as a lingua francaE Tarone, 747 - 752Shawn FordGang Dong, 42 - 44Lourdes Ortega, 110-112, 116 - 118Gang DongDevelopment of L2 MorphologyConcept Oriented Approach ---->

Learners express particular concept Most important in LA --->

MEANINGHow you say things --> not that important -- >focuses on what you sayLearners' procedure in phasesP1) Pragmatic Means---> scaffolding she steal bread/and run away from the shop--->

listeners assume that things happened in the same order as have been told

P2) Lexical Means added: then the car of police come/ so he ride this car/ next the woman ride too----> use of temporal, locative adverbials, connectives such as "then" to indicate time

P3) Morphological Means added---->indicates temporality and suddenly she cried/ and later she tried to run away---> tense indicates temporal relations

FossilizationCoined by Selinker in 1972 - "permanent lack of mastery of a target language TL despite continuous exposure to the TL input, adequate motivation to improve and sufficient opportunity to practice"Several Cases of fossilizationAlberto (Schumann 1976) = unable to move beyond basic EnglishPatty (Lardiere 2007) = instructed learner (L1 - Mandarin) - achieved a very high level of competence in L2 BUT ceased in L2 bound verbal morphologyGeng and Fong (Han 2000 - 2006) = adults (Chinese L1 background) + optimal learning circumstances in L2 English but failed to use passive in obligatory contextsInstruction, Development and Learners' ReadinessLearner readiness (Pienemann 1984-89) Instruction" is constrained by development - Teachers can only hope to teach successfully what learners are developmentally ready to learn". Fewer errors - not always a good thing

For some searchers: F is inevitable - All learners are expected to fossilize,and some do sooner and others do it later.

For others researchers,fossilization affects some learners but not others.

The one-to-one principle: one meaning is always expressed by one form - no taking the risk of looking for synonymsThe transfer to somewhere principle: a grammatical form occurs many times as a result of transfer in the InterlanguageThe relexification principle: students use L1 sentence structure filled in with L2 lexical itemsWhy do we care?Selinker (1992: 218): “no other subjectmatter needs to integrate pedagogical concerns as we do"Improve the process of L2 learning Comparisons between languages - enable teachers make their students aware of the differences and similaritiesTeachers would be able to identify their students' errorsAid in designing and selecting proper course books for L2 studentsRosa Muñoz Luna, 69 - 70General Purpose: compare interlanguage requests of advanced ESL learners with British native speakers on a written discourse completion task Procedure: 187 students (95ESLlearners/92L1native speakersSubjects - a short description of the scenario, which specified the setting, the familiarity and the social power between the participants - then asked to complete the dialogue by performing a request for an assignment extension from their lecturer. Interlanguage Requests in AcademicEncounters -

Tiana Ken prezi "THERE IS NO END AND THERE IS NO STATE" Diane Larsen Freeman "Language is a dynamic ,constantly evolving,and self-organizing."

"An individual’s language resources are ever mutable,and their development continues,even development of the L1 "(MacWhinney 1999)

“Studies of fossilization in sla” Han -Odlin 2005Steve Kaufmann- LinguistFindings:Kogetsidis et al, 2007By: Marie Pouilles Tamara Melicova Maria KoraiLearners underused the politeness marker "please" as compared to NSLearners used fewer apologies but overused imposition minimisers and preparators in external modification as compared to NS.Both groups employed the grounder as the most frequent external modification deviceNS made more frequent use of impersonal perspective combined with formulaic constructions

"Excuse me.Because something happened to my family (grounder)I need a few days off.I understand it is very soon to ask something likethis but (disarmer) I would be very pleased if you give me these days""I’m really sorry(apology)but I will have to take some leave at shortnotice as my grandmother has requested that I see her. I don’t think she’s got very long

(grounder)"

Individual SituationsKogetsidis et al, 2007ConclusionL2 learners' pragmatic performance may present deviations from that of native speakersSometimes their deviations may lead to pragmatic and sociolinguistic failureImplications for ESL teachingNeed for the development of pragmatic competence in L2 learning1)Pragmatics should be included in second language teaching2)Textbook materials need to be more culture - orientedConcept Oriented Approach is NOT interested in mistakes in grammar